[Google noticed you were plotting against them, so Gmail filed your message under "Spam"!]
bastien ROUCARIES wrote: > +Tag: license-problem-non-free-RFC-BCP78 > +Severity: serious > +Certainty: possible > +Info: The given source file is licensed under the newer RFC > + license (BCP78). > + . > + The majority of IETF documents, such as RFCs, are not licensed > + under DFSG-free terms, and should thus not be included in Debian main. > + . > + If this file is multi-licensed, please override the tag. > + . > + If this is a false-positive, please report a bug against Lintian. > +Ref: https://wiki.debian.org/NonFreeIETFDocuments This doesn't exactly make it clear: is BCP78 the license that the non-free majority of IETF documents are under? What is it newer than? Just the old public-domain-by-default license? (Does it matter?) It might be clearer (assuming it's equally true) to say: Info: The given source file is licensed under the non-free RFC license (BCP78). . The majority of newer IETF documents, such as RFCs, are not [...] > +Tag: license-problem-gfdl-non-official-text > +Severity: pedantic > +Certainty: possible > +Info: The given source file is licensed under GFDL, but using a non > + official text for the no invariant part. hyphenate "non-official", and rephrase the last part: Info: The given source file is licensed under GFDL, but using a non-official text for the "no invariant sections" part. > + . > + Please ask upstream to always use (case insensitive): > + with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. > > + > +Tag: source-is-missing > +Severity: serious > +Certainty: possible > +Info: The source of the following file is missing. Lintian checked a few > + possible path to found the source, and do not find it. ^ XX X Info: The source of the following file is missing. Lintian checked a few possible paths to find the source, and did not find it. > + . > + Please repack your package to include the source or add it to > + debian/missing-sources dir. Presumably that's "add it to the debian/missing-sources directory" (does this mean as a patch?) > + . > + If this is a false-positive, please report a bug against Lintian. > > > Info: This package creates a potential privacy breach by fetching data > from an external website at runtime. Please remove these scripts or > external HTML resources. > + . > + Please replace any scripts, images or other remote resources with ^ Strict d-l-e house style would add a "Harvard comma" after "images", but if other lintian messages leave this out then it consistency is best. > + non-remote resources. It is preferrable to replace them with text and preferable (Global search-and-replace to catch repeated cases with this text) [...] > +Tag: privacy-breach-google-plus > +Severity: serious > +Certainty: possible > +Info: This package creates a potential privacy breach by > + exchanging data with google+ at runtime via plugins such > + as "+1" buttons. s/google+/Google+/ and likewise [...] > +Tag: privacy-breach-twitter > +Severity: serious > +Certainty: possible > +Info: This package creates a potential privacy breach by > + exchanging data with twitter at runtime via plugins. s/twitter/Twitter/ [...] > Tag: privacy-breach-piwik > Severity: serious > Certainty: possible > -Info: This package creates a privacy breach by using Piwik. > +Info: This package creates a privacy breach by using an online > + Piwik module. > + . > Piwik is a free and open source web analytics application, designed to > allow publishers of websites to track visitors. > . > Even though Piwik is free and respects the "Do Not Track" browser > - option, it is nevertheless a breach of the privacy of web users. > + option, it is nevertheless a breach of the privacy of web users, > + by fetching data from internet. That "by" phrase needs a verb, and "a breach" won't do, but this will: > option, it nevertheless breaches the privacy of web users by > fetching data from the Internet. [...] > Tag: privacy-breach-w3c-valid-html > Severity: serious > @@ -1025,12 +1106,12 @@ Info: This package creates a potential privacy breach > by fetching W3C > validation icons. > . > These badges may be displayed to tell readers that care has been > - taken to make a page compliant with W3C standards. Unfortunately, > + taken to make a page compliant with W3C standards. Unfortunately, X > downloading the image from www.w3.org might expose the reader's IP > address to potential tracking. > . > Note that these icons are non-free and must not be copied into the > - package. You could safely delete this W3C validation badge. > + package. You could safely delete this W3C validation badge. X Again the d-l-e house style is singlespacing, and that seems to be what you're using elsewhere too, so I'd recommend reverting these. -- JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
